fafalone Posted April 28, 2003 Share Posted April 28, 2003 Originally posted by Radical Edward yes. electrons often travel faster than light. I've never heard of this, especially considering electrons have some mass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superchump Posted April 28, 2003 Share Posted April 28, 2003 Originally posted by fafalone I've never heard of this, especially considering electrons have some mass. KHinfcube22 never specified "in a vacuum". I'm assuming Radical Edward is talking about chekhov radiation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted April 28, 2003 Share Posted April 28, 2003 Originally posted by fafalone A singularity is an infinitely small point, the escape velocity approaches infinity as you approach the singularity. No it isn't. It requires infinite energy to remove oneself from a black hole, not infinite velocity. For any singularities to exist by your definition, there would have to be infinite mass at this point, and thus all of the universe would have infinite gravity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fafalone Posted April 28, 2003 Share Posted April 28, 2003 So what is the mass of a singularity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted April 28, 2003 Share Posted April 28, 2003 Originally posted by fafalone So what is the mass of a singularity? What kind of question is that? To use the cliché, 'How long is a piece of string'? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
superchump Posted April 28, 2003 Share Posted April 28, 2003 Originally posted by fafalone So what is the mass of a singularity? Directly proportional to the Schwarzschild radius of a black hole. At least for Schwarzschild Black Holes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dluther Posted April 28, 2003 Share Posted April 28, 2003 Try reading to book faster than the speed of light... very interesting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raider Posted April 28, 2003 Share Posted April 28, 2003 For any singularities to exist by your definition, there would have to be infinite mass at this point, and thus all of the universe would have infinite gravity. This is not true. Singularities have infinite density because they occupy infintely small space. They do not have infinte mass in finite space. edit:bag tag Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KHinfcube22 Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 but black holes do weigh a lot, even giga tons for the tiny ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajinVegeta Posted April 29, 2003 Author Share Posted April 29, 2003 Yes, they have infinitely small mass. Are you having trouble comprehending infinity? I could explain it quite conceptually (with a hint of math) if you like. What's the difference between a "regular" black hole, and a schwartzchild black hole? Don't they all emit schwartzchild radiation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 Originally posted by Raider This is not true. Singularities have infinite density because they occupy infintely small space. They do not have infinte mass in finite space. I would comment, but I won't until I consult a tome of authority, which unfortunately I am lacking at this location. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajinVegeta Posted April 29, 2003 Author Share Posted April 29, 2003 Originally posted by Radical Edward yes. electrons often travel faster than light. That would not make sense. For one, electrons are classified as leptons. Leptons only travel at c. I could say more, but it would be pointless as the aforementioned is sufficient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JaKiri Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 Originally posted by MajinVegeta That would not make sense. For one, electrons are classified as leptons. Leptons only travel at c. I could say more, but it would be pointless as the aforementioned is sufficient. He may well be referring to quantum tunneling effects, or has been previously been mentioned 'speed of light in a medium'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radical Edward Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 Originally posted by MrL_JaKiri He may well be referring to quantum tunneling effects, or has been previously been mentioned 'speed of light in a medium'. both actually. I was being annoyingly vague on purpose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radical Edward Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 Originally posted by MajinVegeta That would not make sense. For one, electrons are classified as leptons. Leptons only travel at c. I could say more, but it would be pointless as the aforementioned is sufficient. massless leptons don't only travel at c. Only force carriers do that, and afaik they are all bosons which is a good job otherwise lasers wouldn't work. Neutrinos are leptons, but they are a grey area, so I will ignore them for the purposes of this answer as I don't know. Although attempts to combine electroweak and strong force often suggest small neutrino masses, and even some experiments are suggesting that neutrinos have a mass too. (edited a bit - I had leptons and fermions mixed up) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fafalone Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 Only massless leptons travel at c. A particles classification as a lepton has little to do with its velocity. If an electron was travelling at c, it would have infinite mass, since its rest mass is non-zero, unlike another lepton-- the photon, which has zero rest mass and travels at c. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radical Edward Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 leptons interact weakly don't they? I don't recall the photon interacting weakly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fafalone Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 Photons do interact in the form of energy transfer... certainly you've heard of photons breaking chemical bonds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radical Edward Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 that is an electromagnetic interaction though, not a weak one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fafalone Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 what about electroweak unification? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radical Edward Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 I know of it, but not enough to comment, other than I believe that it is only relevant in high energy scenarios, and not when considering chemical bonds. However if you know enough about electroweak unification to demonstrate that a photon is a lepton, then I would be glad to hear it. all the tables of leptons I ever see look like in here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fafalone Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 The standard model has its problems... But if you had to classify a photon particle (think wave-particle duality, so it's certainly not a very good way of classifying it), it's more like a lepton than a meson or baryon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radical Edward Posted April 29, 2003 Share Posted April 29, 2003 I think of photons as excitations of the electromagnetic field mostly, you are right though that the particle issue is a grey one, but then it is for electrons and so on too, which also have a wave nature. From my understanding, Leptons and Quarks make up matter (Quarks only really exist within Mesons and Baryons at low energies) and both consist of three families electron, muon, tau plus neutrinos for the leptons... and for quarks up,down and so on. The force carriers are not lumped into these categories, as they are not in themselves regarded as matter (although they may have mass) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raider Posted April 30, 2003 Share Posted April 30, 2003 Yes, they have infinitely small mass. That is the first time i've ever seen anyone say that. Typo? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MajinVegeta Posted April 30, 2003 Author Share Posted April 30, 2003 The most important point, Radical Edward, is that if electrons did travel at c+, then, we wouldn't be able to detect them in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now